Hacker News Reader

Comment by Frafabowa | Hacker News Reader

Obviously that's bad for businesses - but it's great for consumers! I think the question that's being asked is if there's some business model out there that delivers what customers want (the ability to just buy a finished product once and have it work decades down the line, like "pass it down to your kids" long) while also delivering profits to shareholders.

There's a reason farmers want the ability to repair their own tractors without having to give John Deere an extra cut, you know.

View on HN

> if there's some business model out there that delivers what customers want ... while also delivering profits to shareholders.

Of course there is, but that's why software in a box cost hundreds or thousands of dollars per version, with minimal bug or security updates thereafter. The grass is always greener, yeah it's a pain in the ass having a ton of $10/mo subscriptions. But I'd much rather have that - as both a consumer and a developer - than have $800 single-sale purchases.

How is it good for consumers to have abandoned software that is not compatible and never will be compatible with newer operating systems?

Two decades ago, for instance Apple was still selling PPC based Macs.

You emulate the abandonware, old OS and all. She kicked the habit recently, but my sister preferred Word 5.1 for Mac for a long time. That was a 68k program, which she dutifully used _on a PC_ while Apple was busy shipping iOS on ARM and Mac OS on x86. The Centris 610 is very tired, but the software still works. (Well, not the original copy. Those install floppies are very dead.) Software can be uniquely persistent, in a way physical artifacts can't, so why are we so insistent on keeping everyone on the upgrade treadmill?

George R.R. Martin pretty famously uses WordStar on DOS. I can't imagine it'd be some win for consumers (either Martin personally, or downstream enjoyers of his books) if he had to be on the latest internet-connected, ad-infested, notification-riddled copy of Windows just so that his OS and Office Suite could repeatedly check to make sure he still has an active subscription and a valid "digital entitlement."

I still use Office 2010. (Though it gets increasingly difficult to activate it, and it last received security updates in 2020.) In 2010 I was using x86_64 (an Athlon 64 X2), and today I'm using x86_64. Why should I upgrade? It happens to still run on Windows 11, but I'd gladly stuff it in a VM to continue using it. (I do use Office <current 365 build> for work, so I can pretty confidently say there is nothing worth paying for in there. The only feature even remotely interesting is PowerQuery for Excel, which is available as an add-in for Office 2010.)

Well, my wife uses one my 5 user Office 365 subscription licenses on her Mac. I use it on my iPad and phone. My mom uses it on her Windows laptop and her iPad.

We each get 1TB of online storage.

Compare that to the $599 that Office for Mac use to cost and that you could only use on one computer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com